linux-kernel - Re: [kconfig-sat] [ANN] init-kconfig - easy way to embrace Linux's kconfig

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20181004200859.GA10237@localhost>
Date:   Thu, 4 Oct 2018 13:09:00 -0700
From:   Josh Triplett <josh@...htriplett.org>
To:     Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
Cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
        Masahiro Yamada <yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com>,
        Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@...radead.org>,
        Sam Ravnborg <sam@...nborg.org>, Petr Vorel <pvorel@...e.cz>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        Valentin Rothberg <valentinrothberg@...il.com>,
        Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@...cle.com>,
        Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>, kconfig-sat@...glegroups.com
Subject: Re: [kconfig-sat] [ANN] init-kconfig - easy way to embrace Linux's
 kconfig

On Thu, Oct 04, 2018 at 01:02:49PM -0700, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> Every now and then a project is born, and they decide to use Linux's
> kconfig to enable configuration of their project. As it stands we *know*
> kconfig is now used in at least over 12 different projects [0]. I myself
> added kconfig to one as well years ago. Even research reveals that
> kconfig has become one of the leading industrial variability modeling
> languages [1] [2].
> 
> What is often difficult to do though is to start off using kconfig and
> integrating it into a project. Or updating / syncing to the latest
> kconfig from upstream Linux.
> 
> I had yet another need to use kconfig for another small project so
> decided to make a clean template others can use and help keep it in sync.
> This is a passive fork which aims to keep in sync with the Linux
> kernel's latest kconfig to make it easier to keep up to date and to
> enable new projects to use and embrace kconfig on their own.  The goal
> is *not* to fork kconfig and evolve it separately, but rather keep in
> sync with the evolution of kconfig on Linux to make it easier for
> projects to use kconfig and also update their own kconfig when needed.

Is there a *fundamental* reason that we couldn't have this *be* Linux
kconfig, whether pulled in by submodule or regular merges, and avoid
having any divergence at all?